Man, back when I was in school you either got your shots or you got booted. I think the difference was there were still a lot of parents, administrators, and public policy makers who remembered what things used to be like.

FunkOut:Oh, you mean like a severe egg allergy that makes getting vaccines grown in eggs a bit of a problem?

I'm an allergist, so I see this not infrequently. Here's how I handle it: 1) Give the patient the vaccination.

That's it. Very simple.

Multiple studies show that even patients with documented true anaphylaxis to eggs can handle vaccinations. Despite this, many vaccine package inserts continue to say that it shouldn't be done. This is purely a CYA move due to all the litigious twatwaffles trolling for personal injury cases.

As someone who is allergic to the Whooping Cough vaccination (one of those 1 / 500,000 reaction kind of things) and thus is forced to rely on 'herd immunity' to avoid getting sick, idiots voluntarily not vaccinating their kids terrifies me.

You aren't just putting your own kid at risk, you're putting at even more risk those of us who don't have a choice to be at risk or not.

Sybarite:Man, back when I was in school you either got your shots or you got booted. I think the difference was there were still a lot of parents, administrators, and public policy makers who remembered what things used to be like.

Exactly.

I've had some elderly people on my street that just flat out asked me if my kids were vaccinated. Don't remember how the conversation came up, just that they wanted to know. I think their granddaughter had decided to not vaccinate her kids, until they told her the horror stories related to polio they had seen as kids.

They're up to date on everything they are supposed to be for school (except the flu shot, since Target won't give the shot to kids). I'm up to date on flu and Tdap, will get MMR booster next year, because I was flat on my ass for half a day after the two shots, but that's mostly because I pass out when I get any sort of shot or blood drawn. Just thinking about it makes me woozy.

All this does is make more paperwork for doctors and nurses. We really need to make these parents attend 20 hours of vaccine education classes, spread over 16 days, at least 50 miles from their homes, during the work week, and charge $2000 a pop.

oliass:If vaccinations work so well, why would you have to worry about non-vaccinated kids contaminating vaccinated kids?

In reality, Vaccines work via 2 methods.

First, most common is direct immunity. You get the shot, you don't get the disease. This is the ideal case.

However, vaccination isn't 100%. It might not take, or it might 'fade' quickly. I have an aunt who's immune system can't remember chicken pox for more than a year(she's had it many times). Don't know why. Detecting such cases is prohibitively expensive because you have to do antibody titers to check whether they're present and in sufficient quantities.

Thus, the 2nd method comes into play - 'herd immunity'. It's a real world phenomenon where, once a sufficient percentage of the population is immune, the 'herd' itself is considered overall immune - since the vaccinated won't become carriers, the infection doesn't go systemic and hit most of those not immune. Basically, even if you introduce an infected transmitter the disease tends to burn out with that 'patient 0' and not spread. Basically - if a disease would hit 90% of those not immune in a population that is 10% immune, it might hit 10% of those not immune in a population that's 90% immune.

We've even reduced it to mathematical equations and simulations. You plug all the factors of a disease - transmission methods, ease of infection, durability of the disease (virus or bacterial), natural immunity, and such into the equations and it tells you the percentage you need. A not particularly transmissive disease like HIV might need a lower immune population than a highly contagious one like smallpox.

In general, vaccines are ~90% effective. There are people who can't get them due to medical reasons. There are immune compromised people for whom you don't even bother vaccinating. Balancing this are the naturally immune. You need ~90% immunity for the herd effect to really be effective. As such we're riding the 'danger line' as is, even a 10% non-vaccination rate would substantially weaken the herd immunity and put people like NkThrasher(allergic to whopping cough vaccine) at vastly increased risk.

spentshells:The what is he point of vaccines that can become overpowered by disease......

That's like saying that we shouldn't bother with swimming lessons because people can still drown even if they know how to swim, when the fact that knowing how to swim reduces an individual's chance of death by drowning 90%. Or that there's no sense in putting seatbelts or airbags in a car because somebody can still die in a 75mph collision.

Worse, really, because the more vaccinated people you have, the lower exposures you have, the less likelihood of your immune system being overwhelmed, vaccine or not.

Vaccines work. We managed to eliminate smallpox, and polio is hanging on by a thread. And the smallpox vaccine was relatively nasty and ineffective compared to more modern ones.

1. They kept their kids home when they get sick. And that means any illness that can be vaccinated against.2. They kept themselves home when their kids get sick.3. They agreed not to sue the living pants off everyone in the vicinity when their child dies of whooping cough or measles or some other easily preventable disease that kills kids.4. They acknowledged that these diseases still exist and can kill people.

The way the antivax campaign carries on, you'd think that measles, mumps, chicken pox, whooping cough, scarlet fever, and all those other fun old diseases were as extinct as smallpox. The tired line "Oh, we don't need to vaccinate our kids because herd immunity" is just wrong. Herd immunity exists BECAUSE of vaccination. Babies still die from whooping cough every year--and I don't buy the line that babies are getting it from adults whose vaccines wore off. The babies are getting it because the babies weren't vaccinated. Once you're an adult, whooping cough doesn't kill you. People stopped getting DPT vaccines and lo and behold, we had a whooping cough epidemic in ten states.

These diseases are real and really killing babies and kids. Wait till polio makes a big resurgence, or endemic measles. No MMR vaccines=measles outbreak. Antivaxxers will have a lot to answer for in a few years when we have paralyzed kids and sterile men wondering "Gee, how come everyone's getting so sick all of a sudden?"

BoxOfBees:First, many of the parents who refused vaccinations for their kids are already more educated than the school officials and lawmakers.

Let's find out how many of those more educated parents have medical degrees. Otherwise, a stay at home mom with a Masters in English isn't in any better position to talk about vaccines.

Second, many parents who refused vaccinations do so selectively, for the health of their children. Just like you wouldn't give your kid every medication under the son if you thought it was potentially harmful or unnecessary, so some parents treat vaccinations.

Again, using what information? Would a doctor do this for his or her own children?

Third, the difference between the present and times past is that the number of required vaccinations are growing at a high rate. Why? Lack of critical thinking skills on the part of, well, everyone. Also, the power (and by power, I mean money) wielded by drug company lobbyists. You don't even need conspiracy theories to arrive at these conclusions.

Are then all doctors just shills of the drug company lobbyists? And what about in countries where healthcare is provided and vaccines are not money makers? It couldn't possibly be that recent medical knowledge regarding certain diseases has changed the positon on what vaccines children should receive.

/still thinks vaccines have their benefits and should be used appropriately

And parents are the best to determine what is appropriate in this case? Maybe not so much.

BoxOfBees:First, many of the parents who refused vaccinations for their kids are already more educated than the school officials and lawmakers.

Second, many parents who refused vaccinations do so selectively, for the health of their children. Just like you wouldn't give your kid every medication under the son if you thought it was potentially harmful or unnecessary, so some parents treat vaccinations.

Third, the difference between the present and times past is that the number of required vaccinations are growing at a high rate. Why? Lack of critical thinking skills on the part of, well, everyone. Also, the power (and by power, I mean money) wielded by drug company lobbyists. You don't even need conspiracy theories to arrive at these conclusions.

/still thinks vaccines have their benefits and should be used appropriately

First, they're not more educated about medicine than physicians, otherwise they'd vaccinate their freaking children. A little knowledge is very dangerous.

Second, selective vaccination does nothing to reduce the risk to your child. It only increases the risk of infection for him or her and also his or her classmates.

Third, the number of vaccinations is growing because we have more vaccines that work. Your immune system sees log orders more pathogens every single day than are contained in the entire recommended vaccination series. Drug company lobbyists are scumbags, but they don't set vaccine schedules, physicians do.

kutsuke:As it stands this one of the silliest laws--it does nothing but infringe on one humans right as a defense against the infringement on human rights.

If your child, being vaccinated, attends a school full of children who have not been vaccinated, isn't yours safe from disease? So, how can you tell someone else that they have to vaccinate their child or have a doctor excuse the vaccination, when forcing you to not give one to your child or have a note from the school saying you have their permission to have your child vaccinated before attending would never fly because of it's clear infringement on your rights? You can't cure stupid with bureaucracy.

If my child has an allergy to a vaccine, or is too young to be immunized, your unvaccinated-by-choice child is placing my child's health in jeopardy. Google "herd immunity" for more info.

If you want to see what life is like without vaccines, check out Pakistan. They have no real vaccination program. Over a MILLION kids die each year from polio, whooping cough, and things you think are unheard of today. India was here a few years ago but they got a program working and they've had ZERO polio incidents when they started vaccinating. So if the only difference between the disease and not having it is vaccination, why wouldn't people vaccinate their kids. The millions who die in Pakistan clearly show the risk in modern day settings.

There are many scientific reasons (herd immunity, less than 100% safety per person, ineffective vaccines, etc) that make it unsafe for a small percentage to skip it, relying on the larger group to have it. Just get your kids the shots. It reduces their chance of death by thousands of times.

My dad barely made it out of the 1940's with all the shyte going around. On the plus side, he didn't get the swine flu when everybody else in the family got it, including my mom (who's somewhat younger).

Thank you mom & pops for getting me vaccinated so I never had to suffer mumps or measles. Also, Rob Schneider you are a dumbass.

In terms of autism, I'm pretty sure there is a huge genetic component. Once you know an autistic kid really well, you start picking up on similar but less severe traits in the parents. Uber-geeky people are getting together and breeding in increasing numbers, meeting each other through online dating and geeky colleges, and having more successful employment in geeky jobs.

Some other reasons for the increase in diagnosis of autism: kids once thought mentally retarded are better diagnosed these days. Plus, kids are a lot better protected in all kinds of ways. Little Bobby at age 2 has less of a chance to spastically run around and get killed by some random accident, like drowning in the local swimming hole. Little Bobby is also less likely to die of a bowel obstruction or whatever at a very young age. Kids now survive to the age where autism is very obvious.

On a darker note, I imagine that in the past, a lot of autistic kids were simply beaten to death. They're often incapable of behaving and physical violence wouldn't do anything to improve the situation. But authoritarian parents or other caregivers with primitive mindsets would think enough beating would cure them. Yeah if by "cured" you mean "dead".

jigger:cefm: The appropriate action would have been to stick with the original policy that has been on the books forever: if your little crotch-fruit isn't vaccinated they aren't allowed ot attend public schools. Period.

Go be a dirty hippie (or crazy vaccine-denier) somewhere else.

Public education is not a right. It's a privilege.

Maybe in your redneck state it's a privilege, but in mine it's considered a right and explicitly stated in the state Constitution: Illinois Constitution, Article X

jigger:meat0918: jigger: cefm: The appropriate action would have been to stick with the original policy that has been on the books forever: if your little crotch-fruit isn't vaccinated they aren't allowed ot attend public schools. Period.

Go be a dirty hippie (or crazy vaccine-denier) somewhere else.

Public education is not a right. It's a privilege.

Different argument, but education is one of the best ways to climb the ladder of success.

Hence why public education is under attack. can't have them poors actually pull themselves up that ladder and compete for my money, now can we?

Is public education really under attack? You sure there aren't people simply trying to improve it, but the entrenched interests want to fight any change tooth and nail?

Yes.

And I like some of the ideas put forth to improve education, like the way some public schools are teaming up with charter schools in some areas rather than fighting, and making sure the charters are doing more than just taking money. But voucher programs are a clear broadside against public school education and the separation of church and state; and aren't working since many parents treat vouchers as a panacea for their child's education, when it wasn't the school, but the parent's attitude towards education that is the problem.

I'd like to see more focus on skilled trades instead of "OMG!!! You NEED a 4 year degree in mechanical engineering because you love repairing cars!"

cefm:The appropriate action would have been to stick with the original policy that has been on the books forever: if your little crotch-fruit isn't vaccinated they aren't allowed ot attend public schools. Period.

FunkOut:Oh, you mean like a severe egg allergy that makes getting vaccines grown in eggs a bit of a problem?

Sure, as long as a doctor provides a signed letter stating the child's alergic reaction to any amount of egg is potentially life threatening (not just a bit of swelling in the immediate area of where the shot was administered). And it has to be a real medical doctor, not some hippy herbalist with an inkjet printed certificate in holistic wellness.

Sybarite:Man, back when I was in school you either got your shots or you got booted. I think the difference was there were still a lot of parents, administrators, and public policy makers who remembered what things used to be like.

At 35, I'm at the tail end of this - grew up with a grandfather who suffered lifelong disabilities from his polio infection. The great-grandkids will only know of him as 'old', not really realizing that his disabilities have existed for decades for no reason connected to 'old age'. Personally, I'm all for vaccination.

On the requirement - at least this will remove those who are really worrying about the cost of a doctor's visit to get the shots; since they'll now need to see one anyways.

/I'm mostly a libertarian//Would still support free vaccination in schools because disease is that scary for me.

TheDumbBlonde:GAT_00: Unvaccinated children should be banned from public schools. No exceptions.

What about undocumented unvaccinated children?

One could rightly assume that your specific subset would in fact fall under the greater umbrella of the original subset of unvaccinated. Thank you though for adding pretty much nothing to the conversation.

I guess on the one hand, this could lead to some doctors actually changing a few minds. on the other hand... when the unvaccinated children start making the vaccinated children sick (herd immunity and all that good stuff), how are the state (and the schools) going to respond to the fact that it sanctioned irresponsible behavior?

Hmmm, I brought up in the thread about him signing the law that says parents can't send their "gay" kids to "straight therapy", that, while I applaud it, couldn't you make the same claim of "bad parenting" about the anti-vaxxers?

newton:I'd like to comment, but I am biased.I helped raise a girlfriends baby from birth.Happy giggling baby girl. Things were great until we got her last round of shots.Within a week she would not make eye contact anymore.Within two weeks she would have nothing to do with us, her demeanor changed so much that we took her in, but the doctors assured us she was fine. It was just less than one month when the full seizures began taking place. At that point they diagnosed her with Guillain Barre. Long story short, She died at 6 months old.

It was 5-8 years later that I began seeing the same story spoken out of other peoples mouths.They seemed to think the immunizations had something to do with it. After looking into it further, It blew my mind that hundreds of others have had the exact same experience with the same timing after immunizations. So, yeah, my mind is blown.

I'm very sorry for your loss.

Your story is not, however, a good argument against requiring vaccination.

In rare cases, Guillain-Barré may develop soon after vaccination, but a causal link has not established. Even if vaccination were linked to an increased risk, however, the incidence of Guillain-Barré is far, far lower than the incidence of measles, polio, pertussis, etc would be if the population were not vaccinated. As well, while Guillain-Barré is serious and has a death rate of 2-3%, most people do recover fully, unlike, say, those with polio. In other words, when you balance the risks of vaccinating against those of not vaccinating, vaccinating is overwhelmingly safer.

That is not a consolation when one of the rare exceptions is someone you love, but public policy shouldn't be based on such extremely rare tragedies.

DarkVader:tenpoundsofcheese: A child needs a note about why they didnt get a vaccination but the child doesnt need a note about getting an abortion.

Yes. And that is, in fact, completely reasonable.

We don't need kids running around unvaccinated.

And we don't need kids having babies.

We tried that. But fundies like TPC would do things like beat / murder / kick out of the house their underage girls if they got knocked up or found out they had an abortion. So we made laws allowing them to be anonymous. Hence no notes. TPC just wants to beat and murder children.

jigger:So you do not have a right to attend the public school? You can be restricted from attending.

That's the whole point. Seriously, that all it is. Maybe you think it's a simple, stupid point, but I just want people to stop saying that attending public school is a right.

Following that definition, there's no such concept of a "right" to begin with. Using that argument is just asking to get lost out in the existentialist weeds. Though, if you can come up with an example of something that it is impossible for you to be restricted from doing, be my guest.

BMFPitt:Even if you weren't known to be allergic, there's a chance that the vaccine would be just naturally ineffective. I would never allow anti-vax kids to be around my family, and would encourage others in the same social group to do the same. Them being outcast from civilized society would be a desirable side effect.

Oh definitely, I know. But I think it carries more social clout when I say "I CAN'T be vaccinated against this, therefore your child you are voluntarily not vaccinating is a threat to my health that I CAN'T mitigate through my own actions other than to avoid contact with them and you" than if I were to say "There's an up to 20% chance that my vaccination is ineffective and thus your kid might pose a threat to my health as a result."

It reframes it from me being worried about the percent risk that my immunity doesn't actually exist combined with the percent risk that their kid actually gets infected into the percent risk that their kid actually gets infected results in me being definitively screwed.

pciszek:mysticcat: Drug company lobbyists are scumbags, but they don't set vaccine schedules, physicians do.

My understanding is that very few vaccines are profitable to manufacture, and pharmaceutical companies have to be pressured into providing them.

Much more significant than any of that is that if everyone is vaccinated, eventually the disease goes extinct, and no one needs the vaccine anymore. Even if not everyone is vaccinated, you still get many fewer people in hospitals.

NkThrasher:I've managed to make a splash with a few friends of ours who were waffling on being antivaxers by declaring that unless their crotchfruit gets vaccinated against whooping cough, I'm not going to spend time with their kid or them, because they are a declared and intentional risk to my health (as previously declared up thread, I'm allergic to that vaccine, so don't have a choice).

So far I'm 3/3 on that strategy playing a part on getting a kid to get vaccinated. Although I think I may be a bit more convincing because I can't be vaccinated for it and thus am definitively at risk as opposed to the discussions about possibilities of risk etc.

Even if you weren't known to be allergic, there's a chance that the vaccine would be just naturally ineffective. I would never allow anti-vax kids to be around my family, and would encourage others in the same social group to do the same. Them being outcast from civilized society would be a desirable side effect.

jigger:Is public education really under attack? You sure there aren't people simply trying to improve it, but the entrenched interests want to fight any change tooth and nail?

There is an element of resistance to change. Education is heavily entrenched in "the old ways" and is very wary of anybody who has any suggestions for improvement. Look no further than how far behind public schools are in technological adoption, for example.

That said, I'll start believing there are people trying to change things for the better when I start seeing suggestions that aren't ultimately just poorly-veiled attempts at dismantling the public education system and handing it over to private business interests for pure profit motives.

There are plenty of things wrong with public ed and plenty of valid options for trying to fix them. None of those options involve handing the system over to businesses that are only interested in turning a profit which is pretty much the only "solution" ever offered by the vultures pretending they're trying to improve things.

Introitus:To all the uninfrommed people in this thread, the US does not give the BCG vaccine. So pick a different pathogen instead of TB please.

With multiple-drug resistant TB floating around, maybe it would be a good idea to start vaccinating against it. (For those who don't know any better: the resistance in question is to antibiotics. Evolving resistance to antibiotics does not change the effectiveness of vaccines, which work by teaching the body's immune system to recognize the pathogen.)

meat0918:Sadly, it's going to take the child of a famous celebrity getting sick with one of these diseases and being hospitalized, or heaven forbid, die, for the pendulum to swing back towards "get vaccinated".

I've managed to make a splash with a few friends of ours who were waffling on being antivaxers by declaring that unless their crotchfruit gets vaccinated against whooping cough, I'm not going to spend time with their kid or them, because they are a declared and intentional risk to my health (as previously declared up thread, I'm allergic to that vaccine, so don't have a choice).

So far I'm 3/3 on that strategy playing a part on getting a kid to get vaccinated. Although I think I may be a bit more convincing because I can't be vaccinated for it and thus am definitively at risk as opposed to the discussions about possibilities of risk etc.

BoxOfBees:First, many of the parents who refused vaccinations for their kids are already more educated than the school officials and lawmakers.

Except that they probably had preconceived notions about vaccinations and tended to visit sites that reaffirmed their notions. Nothing like being educated via Echo Chamber University.

BoxOfBees:Second, many parents who refused vaccinations do so selectively, for the health of their children. Just like you wouldn't give your kid every medication under the son if you thought it was potentially harmful or unnecessary, so some parents treat vaccinations.

Vaccinations can be dangerous. There is a probability of 1 in X that your child will have an adverse reaction. But we still vaccinate because in an unvaccinated population, there is a probability of 1 in Y that your child will be infected with a disease. As long as X is less frequent than Y, we vaccinate. It is a calculated gamble.

Anti-vax people either fail to understand the probabilities or are fully aware and just want to push the responsibility onto others, betting that enough people won't play the system like they are so that they're still protected by herd immunity. Problem is, herd immunity is breaking down. They're gambling and losing. It is highly irresponsible.

BoxOfBees:Third, the difference between the present and times past is that the number of required vaccinations are growing at a high rate. Why? Lack of critical thinking skills on the part of, well, everyone. Also, the power (and by power, I mean money) wielded by drug company lobbyists. You don't even need conspiracy theories to arrive at these conclusions.

The majority of those diseases have a mortality rate of at least 10%. Others will shorten your lifespan or will severely degrade the quality of it. Every vaccine listed should be there. Only an idiot would voluntarily skip them.

Even if drug companies are making vast sums of money from the vaccines, sometimes you have to realize that there is a lesser of two evils here. If you have a problem with private companies controlling the manufacture of these vaccines, vote for a candidate who would push for government manufacturing facilities.

I mean, I could be all defiant and anti-corporatist and skip my mumps vaccine, or I can get orchitis and suffer as my balls feel like they're on fire as they atrophy.

At the time, Davis was a wanted man: the California Highway Patrol had issued an all points bulletin for a violation of parole for a previous crime; any police officer who encountered him would arrest him on that charge. (The bulletin was broadcast on the CHP channel, which only CHP radios could receive. CHP practice changed after the case; such bulletins are now broadcast on all police channels.)

During the search, police officers encountered Davis in a nearby rural area, where his Ford Pinto was stuck in the mud. Unaware of the APB, the local police released him after calling his driver's license number in to their dispatcher (which only traced his driving record, but not his criminal record). It is believed that he promptly drove to an isolated spot, killed Polly, and buried her in a shallow grave.

On November 30, police arrested Davis for violation of parole during routine patrol and the arresting officer recognized him from police sketches. As his palm print had been found in Klaas's bedroom, he was charged with the crime. Four days later, he led police to Polly's body near Cloverdale. Davis said that he strangled her from behind with a piece of cloth. Although there was no method to scientifically validate this statement, as the body had decayed for two months, it was consistent with the evidence.

So you're ok with barring policing agencies from talking to each other so you can feel better about fulfilling some liberal agenda? You're ok with making it harder to crack down on sex trafficking of children by illegal immigrants?

I generally don't respond to people who try to put words in my mouth, but I suppose I will this time. You are trying to drum up fear of "ILLEGALS!" by citing a case that had nothing to do with immigrants, legal or otherwise. And that's it. If you've got some sort of agenda, since you brought it up, about sex trafficking of children by illegal immigrants, trying citing some of those cases, genius.

spentshells:Felgraf: oliass: If vaccinations work so well, why would you have to worry about non-vaccinated kids contaminating vaccinated kids?

Because there's such a thing as a viral threshold? Because even the vaccines can get overwhelmed?

that's like saying "If your dams and levees work so well, why should you have to worry about me blowing up the hoover dam upstream?"

The what is he point of vaccines that can become overpowered by disease......

Are you farking kidding? It's been explained 5 times already in this thread alone, let alone the hundreds of times it has been explained in every Fark vaccine thread since time immemorial. If you don't understand it by now, you must simply be too stupid to understand it at all.

MrEricSir:Governor Moonbeam is far saner than any of the past few clowns we've elected as governor.

He does do some good stuff. Giving illegals drivers licenses isn't really helpful if you ask me, since driving without insurance is a crime in California. California has too many people as it is. Especially on the road ways.

Brown also veoted another immigration-related measure, the Trust Act. It would have prohibited local law enforcement officers from cooperating with federal authorities to detain suspected illegal immigrants, unless they are charged with a serious or violent felony.

Imagine you have Polly Klaas 2.0 and because law enforcement is prohibited from arresting and holding illegal immigrant Miguel Diaz for a running a red light, Polly Klaas 2.0 gets murdered after the cops let the guy go.

cefm:The appropriate action would have been to stick with the original policy that has been on the books forever: if your little crotch-fruit isn't vaccinated they aren't allowed ot attend public schools. Period.

Go be a dirty hippie (or crazy vaccine-denier) somewhere else.

Let's put them in Red Shirts so that the rest of us can keep our kids away from Ensign Vector.

The appropriate action would have been to stick with the original policy that has been on the books forever: if your little crotch-fruit isn't vaccinated they aren't allowed ot attend public schools. Period.

First, many of the parents who refused vaccinations for their kids are already more educated than the school officials and lawmakers.

Second, many parents who refused vaccinations do so selectively, for the health of their children. Just like you wouldn't give your kid every medication under the son if you thought it was potentially harmful or unnecessary, so some parents treat vaccinations.

Third, the difference between the present and times past is that the number of required vaccinations are growing at a high rate. Why? Lack of critical thinking skills on the part of, well, everyone. Also, the power (and by power, I mean money) wielded by drug company lobbyists. You don't even need conspiracy theories to arrive at these conclusions.

/still thinks vaccines have their benefits and should be used appropriately

AB2109 will require parents who enroll students who have not received the required public school vaccines to get a waiver from a physician or a nurse practitioner saying they have received information about the benefits and risks of immunization.

Sybarite:Man, back when I was in school you either got your shots or you got booted. I think the difference was there were still a lot of parents, administrators, and public policy makers who remembered what things used to be like.

kbronsito:I guess on the one hand, this could lead to some doctors actually changing a few minds. on the other hand... when the unvaccinated children start making the vaccinated children sick (herd immunity and all that good stuff), how are the state (and the schools) going to respond to the fact that it sanctioned irresponsible behavior?